1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 223,862,438 and KRW 36,553,18 among them. From November 12, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 27, 2010, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 650,000,000 per annum to the Codefendant C Co-Defendant C Co-Defendant Co-Defendant Co-Defendant Co-Defendant Co-Defendant Co., Ltd (hereinafter “C”) (hereinafter “Co-Defendant”) on a settlement recommendation as of August 11, 201, at the interest rate of 6.425% per annum, at the overdue interest rate of 19% per annum, and on July 27, 2011.

B. As between the Plaintiff and Defendant A, Defendant A and Defendant B, respectively, on July 27, 2010, and July 22, 2010.

With respect to the obligations of loans as stated in paragraph (1) (hereinafter “instant loan obligations”), C entered into each contract of collateral guarantee (hereinafter “each of the instant loan obligations”) with the content that C will provide a joint and several guarantee for the present and future obligations owed to the Plaintiff.

C. Since then, although the repayment date of the instant loan obligation against C was extended by one year, C did not pay part of the above loan principal and interest. On November 11, 2004, as a result of settlement of accounts on November 11, 2004, C settled the amount of interest and interest on outstanding loan to the Plaintiff (i.e., principal amount of KRW 187,309,250,000,000).

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the facts established on the basis of the determination of the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable with C to pay the principal and interest of the loan to the Plaintiff as joint and several sureties based on each of the instant collateral guarantee contracts, and as a result, compensation for delay of KRW 36,53,188, the borrowed principal and interest of the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant A, first of all, asserts that the above defendant was not liable as a joint and several surety because he was a representative director in the name of C under the plaintiff's understanding, and the above defendant was not liable as a joint and several surety.

However, the fact that the above defendant, as the representative director of C at the time of the instant collateral security, entered into the instant collateral security contract with the Plaintiff is not disputed between the parties, and D's new system is established according to the witness D's testimony.